Ghirlanda Stefano
Kräftriket 7B, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden.
J Theor Biol. 2002 Feb 7;214(3):389-404. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.2001.2452.
I briefly review empirical data about the generalization of acquired behaviour to novel stimuli, showing that variations in stimulus intensity affect behaviour differently from variations in characteristics such as, for instance, visual shape or sound frequency. I argue that such differences can be seen already in how the sense organs react to changes in intensity compared to changes in other stimulus characteristics. I then evaluate a number of models of generalization with respect to their ability to reproduce intensity generalization. I reach three main conclusions. First, realistic stimulus representations, based on knowledge of the sense organs, are necessary to account for intensity effects. Models employing stimulus representations too remote from the sense organs are unable to reproduce the data. Second, the intuitive notion that generalization is based on similarities between stimuli, possibly modelled as distances in an appropriate representation space, is difficult to reconcile with data about intensity generalization. Third, several simple models, in conjunction with realistic stimulus representations, can account for a wide array of generalization phenomena along both intensity and non-intensity stimulus dimensions. The paper also introduces concepts which may be generally useful to evaluate and compare different models of behaviour.
我简要回顾了关于习得行为向新刺激泛化的实证数据，表明刺激强度的变化对行为的影响与诸如视觉形状或声音频率等特征的变化不同。我认为，与其他刺激特征的变化相比，感觉器官对强度变化的反应方式中已经可以看出这种差异。然后，我评估了一些泛化模型在再现强度泛化方面的能力。我得出三个主要结论。第一，基于感觉器官知识的现实刺激表征对于解释强度效应是必要的。采用与感觉器官距离过远的刺激表征的模型无法再现数据。第二，泛化基于刺激之间的相似性（可能在适当的表征空间中建模为距离）这一直观概念难以与关于强度泛化的数据相协调。第三，几个简单模型与现实刺激表征相结合，可以解释强度和非强度刺激维度上的广泛泛化现象。本文还介绍了一些概念，这些概念可能对评估和比较不同的行为模型普遍有用。
